(1) Purpose: Despite growing interest in AR/VR technologies for protected areas, systematic understanding of how they support ecological conservation remains limited. This study reviews the applications of AR/VR in national parks, examining the mechanisms through which these technologies influence tourist cognition and behavior to support conservation objectives. (2) Methods: A systematic review was conducted on 29 peer-reviewed studies (2014–2024) from Web of Science, ProQuest, and Scopus. Studies were screened based on their focus on AR/VR applications in national parks and related conservation outcomes. (3) Results: AR/VR technologies operate via three core mechanisms—substitution, enhancement, and guidance—allowing virtual access to sensitive areas, enriching ecological interpretation, and directing tourist flow. Applications were categorized into four functional types: educational, navigational, conservation-oriented, and entertainment-oriented. Conservation-oriented functions, including substitute visitation and ecological impact simulations, most directly advance park management and protection goals. Effective implementation requires aligning technological interventions with ecological context, tourist functions, and management zoning. (4) Conclusion: AR/VR technologies offer practical tools for balancing tourist engagement and ecological protection in national parks. Future research should focus on long-term ecological impacts, empirical validation of conservation outcomes, and context-specific adaptation, supporting the transition from conceptual exploration to tangible environmental benefits.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: